Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 3 cited by

Externally irradiated young stars in NGC 3603. A JWST NIRSpec catalogue of pre-main-sequence stars in a massive star formation region

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read JWST NIRSpec spectra show 42 stars in NGC 3603 are actively accreting, including twelve with ages of at least 10 Myr and four at 15 Myr or more.

desk verdict A careful, honest NIRSpec catalog of 42 accreting PMS stars in NGC 3603, with a plausible but not fully demonstrated claim of elevated accretion rates at fixed age and mass. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.05650 v3 pith:UM6DXE2V submitted 2024-12-07 astro-ph.SR astro-ph.EPastro-ph.GA

Ciarán Rogers , Guido de Marchi , Bernhard Brandl This is my paper · ORCID
classification astro-ph.SRastro-ph.EPastro-ph.GA
keywords NGC3603pre-main-sequencestarsmassaccretionratesprotoplanetarydisksexternalphotoevaporationJWSTNIRSpecstarformationH2emission
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper uses JWST NIRSpec multi-object spectroscopy to build the first detailed catalogue of 100 stars in NGC 3603, the Milky Way's nearest analogue to a starburst cluster, and identifies 42 as pre-main-sequence stars that are still actively accreting gas from their disks. Its central claim is that accretion is not shut off by the cluster's extreme ultraviolet radiation: twelve of these stars have ages consistent with at least 10 Myr, four with at least 15 Myr, well beyond the usual 5–10 Myr disk dispersal timescales. The paper further claims that their mass accretion rates span five orders of magnitude and are systematically higher for a given stellar mass and age than in nearby low-mass star-forming regions, and that the excess accretion tracks the density of ambient molecular gas traced by nebular H2 emission. If correct, this means the environments where most stars actually form can keep disks alive and accreting far longer than the standard picture allows, with the surrounding gas supply playing a central role in how planets grow.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by four linked pieces. (1) A scaled nebular-subtraction scheme uses the He I 1.869 $\mu$m doublet as a brightness reference, scaling the subtraction until He I vanishes and thereby recovering the stellar hydrogen lines from a bright, spatially variable nebula. (2) An MCMC spectral-fitting routine matches each source against Phoenix stellar atmosphere models reddened with the G23 extinction curve and veiled by a single blackbody component, yielding effective temperature, extinction, and veiling; five line-poor continuum sources are instead fitted to their optical SEDs. (3) Stars are placed on the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram with MIST isochrones to get masses, ages, and radii. (4) Br$\gamma$ (or Pa$\alpha$ for sources where Br$\gamma$ is in absorption) line luminosity is converted to accretion luminosity with the A17 and D11 calibrations, then to $\dot{M}_{\rm acc} \sim 1.25\,L_{\rm acc} R_*/(G M_*)$; a multivariate fit removes the mass and age dependence before the residuals are compared with nebular H$_2$, H$\alpha$, and distance.

What would settle it

Take the four sources with nominal ages of at least 15 Myr and date them with an independent clock, such as lithium depletion, kinematics, or binary orbit. If they turn out to be significantly younger than 10 Myr, the long-lived accretion claim fails. As a second test, repeat the H2–$\dot{M}_{\rm acc}$ correlation on a larger sample with a molecular gas tracer that does not depend on the same nebular subtraction; if the correlation disappears, the environmental claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery is a population of old, actively accreting pre-main-sequence stars in a massive, UV-dominated cluster, plus a spatial correlation between how fast a star accretes and how much molecular gas surrounds it. Of 100 NIRSpec spectra, 42 show hydrogen recombination lines (Paα, Brγ, Brβ) above the chromospheric level after nebular subtraction, confirming ongoing magnetospheric accretion. Placing these stars on the Hertzsprung-Russell diagram with MIST isochrones yields masses from 0.5 to 7 $M_\odot$ and a tail of ages at 10–20 Myr; accretion rates inferred from Brγ and Paα line luminosities span five orders of magnitude and, at fixed stellar mass and age, exceed those of comparison samples in low-mass star-forming regions. After fitting and removing the joint dependence of $\dot{M}_{\rm acc}$ on mass and age, the residuals correlate positively with nebular H2 brightness, suggesting late infall or shielding by dense molecular gas sustains accretion; no such correlation appears with ionized Hα or with radial distance from the cluster centre.

Load-bearing premise

The ages of the stars, and therefore the claims of 10–20 Myr accretion and of slower accretion decline, rest entirely on the isochronal age scale and the adopted extinction curve; the paper itself states that a different extinction correction moves the nominal 15 Myr sources to about 50 Myr.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Active gas accretion persists in NGC 3603 for at least 10 Myr, with four sources at 15 Myr or more, under an ultraviolet field orders of magnitude stronger than in Orion.
  • At fixed stellar mass and age, $\dot{M}_{\rm acc}$ values are systematically higher than in the comparison low-mass star-forming regions, and the decline of $\dot{M}_{\rm acc}$ with age is shallower.
  • After removing the mass and age dependence, the residual accretion rate correlates positively with nebular H$_2$ brightness; no such correlation appears with nebular H$\alpha$ or with distance from the cluster centre.
  • Most accreting sources (26 of 42) are Class III, with no detectable JHK excess, so surveys that identify disks by near-infrared continuum excess alone will miss most active accretors at these ages.
  • The older accreting sources lie at larger projected distances from the cluster centre than the younger ones, a separation supported by a K-S test and bootstrap confidence intervals.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the 10–20 Myr ages survive independent checks, then disk-lifetime estimates based on near-infrared continuum excess systematically underestimate disk longevity in massive clusters, since most of the accretors in this sample show no JHK excess.
  • The H2–$\dot{M}_{\rm acc}$ correlation, if causal, points to dense gas replenishing or shielding disks; a direct test would compare disk gas masses and radii, for example with submillimetre interferometry, between sources in the dense pillars and those in the low-density central bubble.
  • The steep $\dot{M}_{\rm acc}$–mass relation implies intermediate-mass stars in such clusters assemble their disks faster, which would shorten the time window for forming giant planet cores before disk dispersal.
  • The updated $L_{\rm acc}$–Pa$\alpha$ relation offers a route to measure accretion in even more crowded or more distant clusters using Pa$\alpha$ alone, where Br$\gamma$ is weaker or absorbed.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper presents JWST NIRSpec MSA spectroscopy of 100 stars in NGC 3603, of which 42 are classified as pre-main-sequence stars with active accretion based on hydrogen recombination lines. The authors use an MCMC spectral fitting procedure with Phoenix models and HST photometry to derive effective temperatures, extinctions, veiling, and stellar parameters; ages and masses are obtained from MIST isochrones. Accretion luminosities are derived from Brγ (or Paα) line fluxes using literature calibrations, and an updated Lacc–LPaα relation is presented. The headline results are: twelve accreting sources with ages consistent with ≥10 Myr (four with ≥15 Myr), mass accretion rates spanning five orders of magnitude and 'systematically higher for a given stellar age and mass' than in low-mass star-forming regions, and a positive correlation between residual accretion rate and ambient nebular H2 emission.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper provides one of the first spectroscopic demonstrations that active disk accretion can persist for longer than ~10 Myr in a massive, UV-hostile starburst cluster, with elevated accretion rates and an environmental correlation with molecular gas density. The work also delivers a valuable catalogue: 42 spectroscopically classified PMS stars with MCMC-derived stellar parameters, extinction, veiling, and Monte Carlo line-flux uncertainties. The data reduction is notably careful: the scaled nebular subtraction is tested against He I residuals, the residual nebular contamination is quantified (≈2% to −8% in Paα), and optimal extraction is validated. The updated Lacc–LPaα relation with a factor ~2.5 reduction in coefficient uncertainties is a useful community resource. These strengths, however, do not by themselves establish the headline comparison claims, which rest on unquantified selection effects, heterogeneous literature calibrations, and a bivariate claim that is not directly tested.

major comments (4)
  1. [§6.3 and Table 2] The abstract and Section 6.3 state that twelve accreting sources have ages consistent with ≥10 Myr and four with ≥15 Myr. However, the best-fit ages listed in Table 2 give only nine sources with ages ≥10 Myr (1339, 1717, 1876, 4104, 1981, 1852, 1854, 1497, 1813) and only two with ages ≥15 Myr (1497, 1813). If 'consistent with' instead means that the 1σ uncertainty interval overlaps the threshold, the criterion is not stated and the counts change (e.g., 1436, 1530, and 2880 have intervals containing 10 Myr). Because the population of old accretors is a central claim, please state the exact criterion used, report the correct counts, and show the individual age posteriors or a table of the relevant sources.
  2. [§6.5, Figures 11–12] The claim that accretion rates are 'systematically higher for a given stellar age and mass' is not demonstrated. Figure 11 compares log Mdot vs log M* with the Donehew & Brittain (2011) relation, and Figure 12 compares log Mdot vs age with the Sicilia-Aguilar et al. (2005) relation, but neither controls for both variables simultaneously. Since Equation (7) gives log Mdot = 1.682 log M* − 0.795 log t − 2.731, a sample skewed toward higher masses (NGC 3603 contains many 2–7 M⊙ sources, while the comparison samples are predominantly below 2 M⊙) will appear above a low-mass sample in the Mdot–age plane even if the underlying Mdot(M*, t) law is identical. Please test the offset directly, for example by computing residuals from the multivariate relation or by comparing a mass-matched subsample, and report the significance of any residual offset.
  3. [§6.5 and §7.6] The comparison samples are not homogeneous with respect to the quantities being compared. The D11 relation combines Herbig AeBe stars, intermediate-mass T Tauri stars, and CTTSs, while the Sicilia-Aguilar sample includes the massive SFR Cepheus OB2; both use different accretion tracers (Brγ, Hα), different Lacc calibrations, different extinction laws, and different isochrones. The paper does not quantify how these systematic differences propagate into the claimed offset in Mdot at fixed age and mass. Without an assessment of these systematics, the environmental interpretation remains vulnerable to calibration-driven shifts.
  4. [§6.6 and Figure 13] The claimed correlation between the residual accretion rate and nebular H2 emission is presented visually, but no statistical test is reported. Given that the sample size is 42 and multiple environmental variables (Hα, H2, radial distance) were examined, a Spearman rank correlation with a p-value (or an equivalent test) is needed to establish the significance of the H2 trend and to rule out a chance finding. The normalization of the axes in Figure 13 is also not defined in the text.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract and §6.5] The wording of the central comparison claim is inconsistent: the abstract says 'systematically higher for a given stellar age and mass', §6.5 says 'for a given mass' (Figure 11), and conclusion 10 says 'for a given age'. Please harmonize the wording with what is actually tested.
  2. [§6.5, Equation (6)] The fit in Equation (6) uses all sources including the low-mass end where the text states there is no apparent trend; consider fitting separate relations for M* < 1 M⊙ and M* ≥ 1 M⊙, or stating why a single power law is appropriate.
  3. [§5.2 and Table 2] For the five continuum sources whose properties were derived from SED fitting alone, the comparison with MUSE spectra (Section 5.2.3) shows Teff underestimates of order 1000 K for source 152; please state explicitly how this systematic affects ages and masses of the SED-fitted sources and whether it influences the old-age population.
  4. [Appendix C, Table C.1] The note says 'a number of sources shows net absorption line profiles for Br7' and that these used Equation (8) and Paα, but in Table C.1 only source 152 is flagged with '−−' for Brγ. Please clarify which sources actually used the Paα-based calibration.
  5. [§6.2] The spectral index α is measured over 1.7–3.0 μm, which is a narrower range than the 1–10 μm normally used for Class I/II/III classification; the caveat in the text is appropriate, but consider also presenting the distribution of α for the restricted range to avoid over-interpretation of the Class III fraction.
  6. [§7.4] The discussion of the lack of circumstellar H2 would benefit from a quantitative upper limit on H2 line flux or EW for a representative source, rather than the purely qualitative statement that no H2 is detected.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central accretion-rate and age claims rest on external calibrations and independent isochrones; the only internal Pa-alpha calibration is a secondary tracer for one source and is not load-bearing.

full rationale

I traced the main derivation chain: spectral types and extinction come from fitting Phoenix models to NIRSpec spectra plus HST photometry; masses and ages come from the external MIST isochrones of Choi et al. (2016); and Mdot is computed from Lacc using the external Gullbring et al. (1998) relation, with Lacc itself obtained from Br-gamma via the external calibrations of Alcala et al. (2017) and Donehew & Brittain (2011). None of these steps reduces, by the paper's own equations, to the quantities being predicted. The one potentially self-referential element is Eq. 8, the updated Lacc-LPa-alpha relation, which is a re-fit of the authors' earlier relation (Rogers et al. 2024c) with unchanged coefficients. However, that relation is anchored to the external A17/D11 Br-gamma calibration, and it is used only for sources whose Br-gamma is in net absorption (notably source 152 in Table C.1). That source was not used to calibrate the relation, so this is a legitimate secondary-tracer calibration rather than a fitted input renamed as a prediction. It also does not drive the central claims of 10-20 Myr accreting stars or the environmental H2 correlation. The age claims explicitly acknowledge that isochronal ages may be systematically underestimated (Sec. 7.7) and that an alternative extinction treatment moves the old sources to even older ages (Sec. 7.6), so the qualitative conclusion is not forced by a circular age definition. The Mdot-H2 analysis removes the fitted M* and age dependence via Eq. 7 and then correlates the residuals with nebular H2 brightness; this is standard residualization, not a correlation manufactured by construction. The abstract's phrase 'for a given stellar age and mass' is stronger than what the two one-dimensional comparison figures strictly demonstrate, but that is a statistical-support weakness rather than a circularity. Overall, the paper is self-contained against external benchmarks and contains no load-bearing circular step.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The catalog's derived properties are anchored to literature models and calibrations (MIST, Phoenix, G23, A17, D11, Gullbring). No new physical entities are postulated. The main fitted quantities, per-source A(V), T_eff, and veiling, all enter the HRD and thus the age and accretion-rate claims.

free parameters (7)
  • A(V) per source = 0.002 to 8.6 mag
    Extinction fitted per star with the G23 curve in the MCMC; drives the HRD positions and hence ages and luminosities.
  • T_eff per source = 3317 to 11611 K
    Effective temperature from Phoenix model matching; determines mass, age, and Lacc through the HRD.
  • Veiling r_lambda and T_bb = r up to 13.1; T_bb 1408 to 4950 K
    Single-blackbody veiling fits; T_bb is poorly constrained (Sec. 6.1), and 22 sources are consistent with zero veiling.
  • Slope and intercept of log Mdot vs log M* (Eq. 6) = 2.99 +/- 0.11 and -8.067
    Fit to the 42 sources; used to claim a steeper relation than D11.
  • Coefficients of multivariate Mdot(M*, age) fit (Eq. 7) = 1.682, -0.795, -2.731
    Used to remove mass and age dependence before correlating residuals with environment.
  • Lacc-LPaα relation coefficients (Eq. 8) = 1.42 +/- 0.08 and 3.33 +/- 0.17
    Re-fit to the authors' own sample; applied to source 152 where Brγ is in absorption.
  • NIR extinction curve exponent alpha = 1.68467
    Fixed from the authors' prior NGC 3603 extinction study (Rogers et al. 2024b); part of the G23 curve.
assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption MIST isochrones and evolutionary tracks are applicable to PMS stars in NGC 3603 at solar metallicity.
    Used to convert T_eff and L into mass, age, and radius (Section 6.3). The paper acknowledges in Section 7.7 that isochronal ages may be systematically underestimated.
  • domain assumption G23 extinction curve with R(V) = 4.8 is valid along the line of sight to NGC 3603.
    R(V)=4.8 is taken from the authors' previous work (Rogers et al. 2024b) and fixed, not fitted. A different R(V) shifts ages (Section 7.6 shows B10's R(V)=3.55 moves a 15 Myr star to about 50 Myr).
  • domain assumption Phoenix stellar atmosphere models with log(g)=4.0 and [Fe/H]=0.0 are adequate templates for the PMS photospheres.
    Surface gravity and metallicity fixed; the paper argues gravity changes are negligible at NIRSpec resolution and NGC 3603 is solar-metallicity (Section 5.1.1, 7.1).
  • domain assumption The A17 and D11 Brγ-to-Lacc calibrations, calibrated on nearby CTTS and Herbig AeBe stars, hold for sources at 7.2 kpc in NGC 3603.
    Central to all Mdot values (Section 6.5). Any environmental or metallicity dependence would change the comparison with low-mass SFRs.
  • domain assumption He I 1.869 µm emission is purely nebular in our sources, so its complete removal gives the correct nebular subtraction.
    Section 4.2.2: tests on archival PMS spectra show circumstellar He I is weak (EW <= 1 A), but the paper notes a possible ~10% underestimate of accretion rates if circumstellar He I is present.
  • domain assumption Nebular hydrogen recombination line flux scales linearly with He I 1.869 µm across the wavelength range.
    Section 4.2.4, Eqs. 1-3: residual Paα flux of about 2% (or up to 8% over-subtraction) is estimated after scaling.
  • domain assumption H2 2.12 µm surface brightness is proportional to the density of ambient molecular gas around each star.
    Used for the environmental correlation in Section 6.6. The paper does not provide independent validation that H2 emission traces gas density rather than, e.g., local excitation.
  • domain assumption Distance to NGC 3603 is 7.2 +/- 0.1 kpc (Drew et al. 2019).
    Converts fluxes to luminosities and sets the HRD positions; a distance error shifts all masses and ages.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Externally irradiated young stars in NGC 3603. A JWST NIRSpec catalogue of pre-main-sequence stars in a massive star formation region." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UM6DXE2V

@misc{pith2026241205650,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Externally irradiated young stars in NGC 3603. A JWST NIRSpec catalogue of pre-main-sequence stars in a massive star formation region},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UM6DXE2V}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.05650}
}
abstract

NGC 3603 is the optically brightest massive star forming region (SFR) in the Milky Way, representing a small scale starburst region. Studying young stars in regions like this allows us to assess how star and planet formation proceeds in a dense clustered environment with high levels of UV radiation. JWST provides the sensitivity, unbroken wavelength coverage, and spatial resolution required to study individual pre-main-sequence (PMS) stars in distant massive SFRs in detail for the first time. Using the Micro-Shutter Assembly (MSA) onboard the Near InfraRed Spectrograph (NIRSpec), multi-object spectroscopy was performed, yielding 100 stellar spectra. We fit the PMS spectra to derive their photospheric properties, extinction, and NIR veiling. From this, we determined the masses and ages of our sources by placing them on the Hertzsprung-Russel diagram (HRD). Their accretion rates were determined by converting the luminosity of hydrogen emission lines to an accretion luminosity. We have classified 42 as actively accreting. Our sources span a range of masses from 0.5 to 7 $M_{\odot}$. Twelve of these accreting sources have ages consistent with $\ge$ 10 Myrs, with four having ages of $\ge$ 15 Myrs. Their mass accretion rates span 5 orders of magnitude and are systematically higher for a given stellar age and mass than for a comparative sample taken from low-mass SFRs. We report an environmental relationship between $\dot{M}_{acc}$ and the density of ambient molecular gas as traced by nebular $H_2$ emission.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.05650 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Relationship between the EW of He I 1.869µm with: left, Paα; centre, Br7; and right, Br6. 5.1.2. Extinction As our NIRSpec spectra cover a wavelength range that is not par￾ticularly sensitive to extinction, we also included HST photom￾etry for each source. The filters employed were F435W (ACS), F555W, F625W, F814W, F110W, and F160W (WFC3). We per￾formed aperture photometry for each source, accounting for the apertur… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Corner plot showing the distribution of parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Best fitting model spectrum shown in red, overplotted on top of the source spectrum shown in black. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Best fitting optical model spectrum for source 152 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: As above for source 354. overlap well with each source’s HST photometry. Despite strong emission lines in their optical spectra, a number of hydrogen ab￾sorption lines are still detected, including Hβ, and a portion of the Paschen series. This provided us with the abil…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Histogram of evolutionary classes for our sample. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: HRD of the PMS sources using spectroscopically determined [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Results of bootstrapping analysis. The projected dis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Accretion rate as a function of stellar mass. The size of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_11.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Normalised accretion rate as a function of the nebular [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_13.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Relationship between Lacc and Paα. The brown line represents the line of best fit and the grey shaded area shows the uncertainty of the fit. 7.2. Hydrogen recombination lines All 42 PMS spectra display some or all of Paα, Br6 and Br7 in emission. Paα λ 1.875 µm and Br…
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Five PMS sources that display Pfund recombination [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: The normalised spectra of the five CO bandhead emis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_17.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. LBT-MODS spectroscopy of young stellar objects in the distant metal-poor star forming region Sh2-284: Stellar and accretion properties

    astro-ph.GA 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In the metal-poor region Sh2-284, disk-bearing young stars accrete at a median rate of ~2.2e-8 Msun/yr, comparable to solar-metallicity regions, with tentative evidence that accretion-tracer flux relations flatten at ...

  2. Line ratio identification of external photoevaporation

    astro-ph.EP 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Emission line ratios such as [SII] 6731/[OIII] 5007 shift by up to a factor of 470 with distance from an OB star, offering an unresolved-spectroscopy route to identifying externally photoevaporating disks in clusters.

  3. exoALMA. XVIII. Interpreting large scale kinematic structures as moderate warping

    astro-ph.EP 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Moderate disk warps of about 0.5 to 2 degrees can reproduce the single-armed velocity patterns seen in many exoALMA disks, and may also explain spiral structures in scattered light and CO temperature.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

144 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 652, A72

    Alcal \'a , J., Gangi, M., Biazzo, K., et al. 2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 652, A72

    2021

  2. [2]

    2017, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 600, A20

    Alcal \'a , J., Manara, C., Natta, A., et al. 2017, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 600, A20

    2017

  3. [3]

    2014, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 561, A2

    Alcal \'a , J., Natta, A., Manara, C., et al. 2014, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 561, A2

    2014

  4. [4]

    Alves de Oliveira, C., Luetzgendorf, N., Ferruit, P., & Rawle, T. 2018

    2018

  5. [5]

    & Montmerle, T

    Andre, P. & Montmerle, T. 1994, The Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 420, no. 2, p. 837-862, 420, 837

    1994

  6. [6]

    G., Nisini, B., et al

    Antoniucci, S., L \'o pez, R. G., Nisini, B., et al. 2014, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 572, A62

    2014

  7. [7]

    2017, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 606, A48

    Antoniucci, S., Nisini, B., Biazzo, K., et al. 2017, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 606, A48

    2017

  8. [8]

    J., Clarke, C

    Armitage, P. J., Clarke, C. J., & Palla, F. 2003, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 342, 1139

    2003

Show all 144 references
  1. [9]

    F., et al

    Aru, M.-L., Mauco, K., Manara, C. F., et al. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 687, A93

    2024

  2. [10]

    & Reipurth, B

    Bally, J. & Reipurth, B. 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 546, 299

    2001

  3. [11]

    & Reipurth, B

    Bally, J. & Reipurth, B. 2003, The Astronomical Journal, 126, 893

    2003

  4. [12]

    S., Weintraub, D

    Bary, J. S., Weintraub, D. A., & Kastner, J. H. 2002, The Astrophysical Journal, 576, L73

    2002

  5. [13]

    2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 720, 1108

    Beccari, G., Spezzi, L., De Marchi, G., et al. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 720, 1108

    2010

  6. [14]

    L., McGregor, P

    Beck, T. L., McGregor, P. J., Takami, M., & Pyo, T.-S. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 676, 472

    2008

  7. [15]

    P., Naylor, T., Mayne, N., Jeffries, R., & Littlefair, S

    Bell, C. P., Naylor, T., Mayne, N., Jeffries, R., & Littlefair, S. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 434, 806

    2013

  8. [16]

    1998, Astronomy and Astrophysics, v

    Benedettini, M., Nisini, B., Giannini, T., et al. 1998, Astronomy and Astrophysics, v. 339, p. 159-164 (1998), 339, 159

    1998

  9. [17]

    R., Apell \'a niz, J

    Berlanas, S. R., Apell \'a niz, J. M., Herrero, A., et al. 2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 671, A20

    2023

  10. [18]

    2023, Nature, 621, 56

    Bern \'e , O., Martin-Drumel, M.-A., Schroetter, I., et al. 2023, Nature, 621, 56

    2023

  11. [19]

    2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 875, 51

    Biazzo, K., Beccari, G., De Marchi, G., & Panagia, N. 2019, The Astrophysical Journal, 875, 51

    2019

  12. [20]

    2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 455, 561

    Bik, A., Kaper, L., & Waters, L. 2006, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 455, 561

    2006

  13. [21]

    & Thi, W

    Bik, A. & Thi, W. 2004, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 427, L13

    2004

  14. [22]

    Boyden, R. D. & Eisner, J. A. 2020, The Astrophysical Journal, 894, 74

    2020

  15. [23]

    2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 682, A61

    Cacciapuoti, L., Macias, E., Gupta, A., et al. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 682, A61

    2024

  16. [24]

    2004, , 128, 1294

    Calvet , N., Muzerolle , J., Brice \ n o , C., et al. 2004, , 128, 1294

    2004

  17. [25]

    2004, The Astronomical Journal, 128, 1294

    Calvet, N., Muzerolle, J., Briceno, C., et al. 2004, The Astronomical Journal, 128, 1294

    2004

  18. [26]

    Carciofi, A. C. & Bjorkman, J. E. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal, 639, 1081

    2006

  19. [27]

    A., Clayton, G

    Cardelli, J. A., Clayton, G. C., & Mathis, J. S. 1989, The Astrophysical Journal, 345, 245

    1989

  20. [28]

    M., Mamajek, E

    Carpenter, J. M., Mamajek, E. E., Hillenbrand, L. A., & Meyer, M. R. 2006, The Astrophysical Journal, 651, L49

    2006

  21. [29]

    2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 823, 102

    Choi, J., Dotter, A., Conroy, C., et al. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 823, 102

    2016

  22. [30]

    A., Kessler-Silacci, J

    Cieza, L. A., Kessler-Silacci, J. E., Jaffe, D. T., Harvey, P. M., & Evans II, N. J. 2005, The Astrophysical Journal, 635, 422

    2005

  23. [31]

    Coleman, G. A. & Haworth, T. J. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters, 496, L111

    2020

  24. [32]

    M., Mandel , K

    Czekala , I., Andrews , S. M., Mandel , K. S., Hogg , D. W., & Green , G. M. 2015, , 812, 128

    2015

  25. [33]

    & Hillenbrand, L

    Dahm, S. & Hillenbrand, L. 2007, The Astronomical Journal, 133, 2072

    2007

  26. [34]

    J., Cervantes, B., Nisini, B., et al

    Davis, C. J., Cervantes, B., Nisini, B., et al. 2011, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 528, A3

    2011

  27. [35]

    2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 775, 68

    De Marchi, G., Beccari, G., & Panagia, N. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 775, 68

    2013

  28. [36]

    2024, The Astrophysical Journal, Accepted

    De Marchi, G., Giardino, G., Biazzo, K., et al. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, Accepted

    2024

  29. [37]

    2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 846, 110

    De Marchi, G., Panagia, N., & Beccari, G. 2017, The Astrophysical Journal, 846, 110

    2017

  30. [38]

    2011 a , The Astrophysical Journal, 740, 11

    De Marchi, G., Panagia, N., Romaniello, M., et al. 2011 a , The Astrophysical Journal, 740, 11

    2011

  31. [39]

    2011 b , The Astrophysical Journal, 740, 10

    De Marchi, G., Panagia, N., & Sabbi, E. 2011 b , The Astrophysical Journal, 740, 10

    2011

  32. [40]

    & Brittain, S

    Donehew, B. & Brittain, S. 2011, The Astronomical Journal, 141, 46

    2011

  33. [41]

    2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 486, 1034

    Drew, J., Mongui \'o , M., & Wright, N. 2019, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 486, 1034

    2019

  34. [42]

    F., Walborn, N

    Drissen, L., Moffat, A. F., Walborn, N. R., & Shara, M. M. 1995, Astronomical Journal v. 110, p. 2235, 110, 2235

    1995

  35. [43]

    2009, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 504, 461

    Fang, M., Van Boekel, R., Wang, W., et al. 2009, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 504, 461

    2009

  36. [44]

    2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 661, A81

    Ferruit, P., Jakobsen, P., Giardino, G., et al. 2022, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 661, A81

    2022

  37. [45]

    Fitzpatrick, E. L. & Massa, D. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 699, 1209

    2009

  38. [46]

    W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J

    Foreman-Mackey, D., Hogg, D. W., Lang, D., & Goodman, J. 2013, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 125, 306

    2013

  39. [47]

    2011, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 195, 3

    Furlan, E., Luhman, K., Espaillat, C., et al. 2011, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 195, 3

    2011

  40. [48]

    D., Bohlin, R., Sloan, G., et al

    Gordon, K. D., Bohlin, R., Sloan, G., et al. 2022, The Astronomical Journal, 163, 267

    2022

  41. [49]

    D., Clayton, G

    Gordon, K. D., Clayton, G. C., Decleir, M., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal, 950, 86

    2023

  42. [50]

    A., Schmeja, S., Dolphin, A

    Gouliermis, D. A., Schmeja, S., Dolphin, A. E., et al. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 748, 64

    2012

  43. [51]

    Greene, T. P. & Lada, C. J. 1996, The Astronomical Journal, 112, 2184

    1996

  44. [52]

    2021, AA, 650, A157

    Guarcello, M., Biazzo, K., Drake, J., et al. 2021, AA, 650, A157

    2021

  45. [53]

    2010, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 521, A61

    Guarcello, M., Micela, G., Peres, G., Prisinzano, L., & Sciortino, S. 2010, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 521, A61

    2010

  46. [54]

    1998, , 492, 323

    Gullbring , E., Hartmann , L., Brice \ n o , C., & Calvet , N. 1998, , 492, 323

    1998

  47. [55]

    E., Lada, E

    Haisch Jr, K. E., Lada, E. A., & Lada, C. J. 2001, The Astrophysical Journal, 553, L153

    2001

  48. [56]

    R., Millman, K

    Harris, C. R., Millman, K. J., Van Der Walt, S. J., et al. 2020, Nature, 585, 357

    2020

  49. [57]

    2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 951, L32

    Harsono, D., Bjerkeli, P., Ramsey, J., et al. 2023, The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 951, L32

    2023

  50. [58]

    1998, , 495, 385

    Hartmann , L., Calvet , N., Gullbring , E., & D'Alessio , P. 1998, , 495, 385

    1998

  51. [59]

    J., Clarke, C

    Haworth, T. J., Clarke, C. J., Rahman, W., Winter, A. J., & Facchini, S. 2018, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 481, 452

    2018

  52. [60]

    J., Coleman, G

    Haworth, T. J., Coleman, G. A., Qiao, L., Sellek, A. D., & Askari, K. 2023, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 526, 4315

    2023

  53. [61]

    J., Allen, L

    Heiderman, A., Evans, N. J., Allen, L. E., Huard, T., & Heyer, M. 2010, The Astrophysical Journal, 723, 1019

    2010

  54. [62]

    & O'dell, C

    Henney, W. & O'dell, C. 1999, The Astronomical Journal, 118, 2350

    1999

  55. [63]

    Herczeg, G. J. & Hillenbrand, L. A. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 681, 594

    2008

  56. [64]

    Herczeg, G. J. & Hillenbrand, L. A. 2014, The Astrophysical Journal, 786, 97

    2014

  57. [65]

    Hillenbrand, L. A. 2005, arXiv preprint astro-ph/0511083

    2005 arXiv

  58. [66]

    1986, , 98, 609

    Horne , K. 1986, , 98, 609

    1986

  59. [67]

    & Dale, D

    Hunter, J. & Dale, D. 2007, Matplotlib 0.90. 0 user’s guide, 487

    2007

  60. [68]

    2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 553, A6

    Husser, T.-O., Wende-von Berg, S., Dreizler, S., et al. 2013, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 553, A6

    2013

  61. [69]

    2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 429, 2960

    Ilee, J., Wheelwright, H., Oudmaijer, R., et al. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 429, 2960

    2013

  62. [70]

    2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 517, 1518

    Jones, O., Reiter, M., Sanchez-Janssen, R., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 517, 1518

    2022

  63. [71]

    2015, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 576, A78

    Kausch, W., Noll, S., Smette, A., et al. 2015, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 576, A78

    2015

  64. [72]

    2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 673, A166

    Kirwan, A., Manara, C., Whelan, E., et al. 2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 673, A166

    2023

  65. [73]

    G., Natta, A., et al

    Koutoulaki, M., Lopez, R. G., Natta, A., et al. 2021, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 645, A50

    2021

  66. [74]

    G., Natta, A., et al

    Koutoulaki, M., Lopez, R. G., Natta, A., et al. 2018, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 614, A90

    2018

  67. [75]

    S., & Haugb lle, T

    Kuffmeier, M., Jensen, S. S., & Haugb lle, T. 2023, The European Physical Journal Plus, 138, 272

    2023

  68. [76]

    2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 593, A78

    Kuncarayakti, H., Galbany, L., Anderson, J., Kr \"u hler, T., & Hamuy, M. 2016, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 593, A78

    2016

  69. [77]

    Lada, C. J. & Lada, E. A. 2003, Annu. Rev. Astron. Astrophys., 41, 57

    2003

  70. [78]

    2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 680, 398

    Lebouteiller, V., Bernard-Salas, J., Brandl, B., et al. 2008, The Astrophysical Journal, 680, 398

    2008

  71. [79]

    Lewis, J. A. & Lada, C. J. 2016, The Astrophysical Journal, 825, 91

    2016

  72. [80]

    2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 424, 1088

    Lumsden, S., Wheelwright, H., Hoare, M., Oudmaijer, R., & Drew, J. 2012, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 424, 1088

    2012

  73. [81]

    2011, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 531, A27

    Maaskant, K., Bik, A., Waters, L., et al. 2011, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 531, A27

    2011

  74. [82]

    Mamajek, E. E. 2009, 1158, 3

    2009

  75. [83]

    2015, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 579, A66

    Manara, C., Testi, L., Natta, A., & Alcal \'a , J. 2015, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 579, A66

    2015

  76. [84]

    P., & Russell , S

    Mannings , V., Boss , A. P., & Russell , S. S., eds. 2000, Protostars and Planets IV

    2000

  77. [85]

    2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 679, A82

    Mauc \'o , K., Manara, C., Ansdell, M., et al. 2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 679, A82

    2023

  78. [86]

    2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 769, 73

    McClure, M., Calvet, N., Espaillat, C., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 769, 73

    2013

  79. [87]

    2012, The Astronomical Journal, 144, 192

    Megeath, S., Gutermuth, R., Muzerolle, J., et al. 2012, The Astronomical Journal, 144, 192

    2012

  80. [88]

    W., Massey, P., Morrell, N

    Melena, N. W., Massey, P., Morrell, N. I., & Zangari, A. M. 2008, The Astronomical Journal, 135, 878

    2008

  81. [89]

    1989, Astronomy and Astrophysics (ISSN 0004-6361), vol

    Melnick, J., Tapia, M., & Terlevich, R. 1989, Astronomy and Astrophysics (ISSN 0004-6361), vol. 213, no. 1-2, April 1989, p. 89-96., 213, 89

    1989

  82. [90]

    M., Reid , M

    Menten , K. M., Reid , M. J., Forbrich , J., & Brunthaler , A. 2007, , 474, 515

    2007

  83. [91]

    2006, arXiv preprint astro-ph/0603554

    Millan-Gabet, R., Malbet, F., Akeson, R., et al. 2006, arXiv preprint astro-ph/0603554

    2006 arXiv

  84. [92]

    A., & Ricci, L

    Miotello, A., Robberto, M., Potenza, M. A., & Ricci, L. 2012, The Astrophysical Journal, 757, 78

    2012

  85. [93]

    2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 535, L47

    Muzerolle, J., Calvet, N., Briceno, C., Hartmann, L., & Hillenbrand, L. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 535, L47

    2000

  86. [94]

    2003 a , The Astrophysical Journal, 597, L149

    Muzerolle, J., Calvet, N., Hartmann, L., & D’Alessio, P. 2003 a , The Astrophysical Journal, 597, L149

    2003

  87. [95]

    1998, The Astronomical Journal, 116, 2965

    Muzerolle, J., Hartmann, L., & Calvet, N. 1998, The Astronomical Journal, 116, 2965

    1998

  88. [96]

    2003 b , The Astrophysical Journal, 592, 266

    Muzerolle, J., Hillenbrand, L., Calvet, N., Briceno, C., & Hartmann, L. 2003 b , The Astrophysical Journal, 592, 266

    2003

  89. [97]

    2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 691, A32

    Ndugu, N., Bitsch, B., & Lienert, J. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 691, A32

    2024

  90. [98]

    2002, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 394, 253

    N \"u rnberger, D., Bronfman, L., Yorke, H., & Zinnecker, H. 2002, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 394, 253

    2002

  91. [99]

    & Petr-Gotzens, M

    N \"u rnberger, D. & Petr-Gotzens, M. 2002, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 382, 537

    2002

  92. [100]

    C., Fedriani, R., Lopez, R

    o Garatti, A. C., Fedriani, R., Lopez, R. G., et al. 2020, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 635, L12

    2020

  93. [101]

    1993, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol

    O'dell, C., Wen, Z., & Hu, X. 1993, Astrophysical Journal, Part 1 (ISSN 0004-637X), vol. 410, no. 2, p. 696-700., 410, 696

    1993

  94. [102]

    Pecaut, M. J. & Mamajek, E. E. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series, 208, 9

    2013

  95. [103]

    B., Gounelle, M., et al

    Pfalzner, S., Davies, M. B., Gounelle, M., et al. 2015, Physica Scripta, 90, 068001

    2015

  96. [104]

    M., Drew, J

    Porter, J. M., Drew, J. E., & Lumsden, S. L. 1998, Astronomy and Astrophysics, v. 332, p. 999-1016 (1998), 332, 999

    1998

  97. [105]

    & Mamajek, E

    Preibisch, T. & Mamajek, E. 2008, arXiv preprint arXiv:0809.0407

    2008 arXiv

  98. [106]

    C., Bik, A., Cuijpers, L., et al

    Ram \' rez-Tannus, M. C., Bik, A., Cuijpers, L., et al. 2023, ApJ, 958, L30

    2023

  99. [107]

    A., & Devine, D

    Reipurth, B., Bally, J., Fesen, R. A., & Devine, D. 1998, Nature, 396, 343

    1998

  100. [108]

    & Zinnecker, H

    Reipurth, B. & Zinnecker, H. 1993, Astronomy and Astrophysics (ISSN 0004-6361), vol. 278, no. 1, p. 81-108, 278, 81

    1993

  101. [109]

    A., Smith, N., et al

    Reiter, M., Morse, J. A., Smith, N., et al. 2022, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 517, 5382

    2022

  102. [110]

    & Smith, N

    Reiter, M. & Smith, N. 2013, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 433, 2226

    2013

  103. [111]

    2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 463, 4344

    Reiter, M., Smith, N., & Bally, J. 2016, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 463, 4344

    2016

  104. [112]

    Ricci, L., Robberto, M., & Soderblom, D. R. 2008, The Astronomical Journal, 136, 2136

    2008

  105. [113]

    Richardson, T., Ginsburg, A., Indebetouw, R., & Robitaille, T. P. 2024, The Astrophysical Journal, 961, 188

    2024

  106. [114]

    Robitaille, T. P. 2017, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 600, A11

    2017

  107. [115]

    2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.05206

    Rocamora, M., Reimer, A., Mart \' -Devesa, G., & Kissmann, R. 2024, arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.05206

    2024 arXiv

  108. [116]

    2024 a , arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.05668 (in review)

    Rogers, C., Brandl, B., & de Marchi, G. 2024 a , arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.05668 (in review)

    2024 arXiv

  109. [117]

    2024 b , Astronomy & Astrophysics, 688, A111

    Rogers, C., Brandl, B., & De Marchi, G. 2024 b , Astronomy & Astrophysics, 688, A111

    2024

  110. [118]

    2024 c , Astronomy & Astrophysics, 684, L8

    Rogers, C., De Marchi, G., & Brandl, B. 2024 c , Astronomy & Astrophysics, 684, L8

    2024

  111. [119]

    R., De Marchi, G., Giardino, G., et al

    Rogers, C. R., De Marchi, G., Giardino, G., et al. 2022, 12180, 1425

    2022

  112. [120]

    2011, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 525, A8

    R \"o llig, M., Kramer, C., Rajbahak, C., et al. 2011, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 525, A8

    2011

  113. [121]

    2006, The Astronomical Journal, 133, 44

    Sabbi, E., Sirianni, M., Nota, A., et al. 2006, The Astronomical Journal, 133, 44

    2006

  114. [122]

    J., Brown, J

    Salyk, C., Herczeg, G. J., Brown, J. M., et al. 2013, The Astrophysical Journal, 769, 21

    2013

  115. [123]

    2015, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 575, A79

    Schneider, N., Ossenkopf, V., Csengeri, T., et al. 2015, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 575, A79

    2015

  116. [124]

    W., Hern \'a ndez, J., Briceno, C., & Calvet, N

    Sicilia-Aguilar, A., Hartmann, L. W., Hern \'a ndez, J., Briceno, C., & Calvet, N. 2005, The Astronomical Journal, 130, 188

    2005

  117. [125]

    Soderblom, D. R. 2010, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 48, 581

    2010

  118. [126]

    Somigliana, A., Toci, C., Lodato, G., Rosotti, G., & Manara, C. F. 2020, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, 492, 1120

    2020

  119. [127]

    G., Feiden, G

    Stassun, K. G., Feiden, G. A., & Torres, G. 2014, New Astronomy Reviews, 60, 1

    2014

  120. [128]

    M., Strom, S

    Strom, K. M., Strom, S. E., Edwards, S., Cabrit, S., & Skrutskie, M. F. 1989, Astronomical Journal (ISSN 0004-6256), vol. 97, May 1989, p. 1451-1470. Research supported by NSF and NASA., 97, 1451

    1989

  121. [129]

    & Bessell, M

    Sung, H. & Bessell, M. S. 2004, The Astronomical Journal, 127, 1014

    2004

  122. [130]

    L., Pyo, T.-S., McGregor, P., & Davis, C

    Takami, M., Beck, T. L., Pyo, T.-S., McGregor, P., & Davis, C. 2007, The Astrophysical Journal, 670, L33

    2007

  123. [131]

    2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 861, 73

    Thanathibodee, T., Calvet, N., Herczeg, G., et al. 2018, The Astrophysical Journal, 861, 73

    2018

  124. [132]

    Tobin, J. J. & Sheehan, P. D. 2024, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 62

    2024

  125. [133]

    2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 675, A203

    Tsilia, S., De Marchi, G., & Panagia, N. 2023, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 675, A203

    2023

  126. [134]

    D., Cushing, M

    Vacca, W. D., Cushing, M. C., & Rayner, J. T. 2003, Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, 115, 389

    2003

  127. [135]

    E., et al

    Virtanen, P., Gommers, R., Oliphant, T. E., et al. 2020, Nature methods, 17, 261

    2020

  128. [136]

    2013, ApJ, 766, L23

    Walsh, C., Millar, T., & Nomura, H. 2013, ApJ, 766, L23

    2013

  129. [137]

    2012, ApJ, 747, 114

    Walsh, C., Nomura, H., Millar, T., & Aikawa, Y. 2012, ApJ, 747, 114

    2012

  130. [138]

    A., Kastner, J

    Weintraub, D. A., Kastner, J. H., & Bary, J. S. 2000, The Astrophysical Journal, 541, 767

    2000

  131. [139]

    1989, The Astrophysical Journal, 340, 823

    Wilking, B., Lada, C., & Young, E. 1989, The Astrophysical Journal, 340, 823

    1989

  132. [140]

    J., Benisty, M., Manara, C

    Winter, A. J., Benisty, M., Manara, C. F., & Gupta, A. 2024, Astronomy & Astrophysics, 691, A169

    2024

  133. [141]

    Winter, A. J. & Haworth, T. J. 2022, The European Physical Journal Plus, 137, 1132

    2022

  134. [142]

    T., Saito, M., & Tokoku, C

    Yasui, C., Kobayashi, N., Tokunaga, A. T., Saito, M., & Tokoku, C. 2009, The Astrophysical Journal, 705, 54

    2009

  135. [143]

    , " * write output.state after.block = add.period write newline

    ENTRY address archiveprefix author booktitle chapter edition editor howpublished institution eprint journal key month note number organization pages publisher school series title type volume year label extra.label sort.label short.list INTEGERS output.state before.all mid.sent...

  136. [144]

    write newline

    " write newline "" before.all 'output.state := FUNCTION n.dashify 't := "" t empty not t #1 #1 substring "-" = t #1 #2 substring "--" = not "--" * t #2 global.max substring 't := t #1 #1 substring "-" = "-" * t #2 global.max substring 't := while if t #1 #1 substring * t #2 gl...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.